Fossil fuel prospectors have cleared another hurdle on their path to drill for oil and gas near an area of outstanding natural beauty (AONB) in the Surrey Hills after campaigners lost a judicial review of the plan.
Opponents of the plan to sink an exploration well near the village of Dunsfold argued it was inconsistent with a decision to refuse a similar application on the basis of the greenhouse gas emissions it would produce.
But in a ruling handed down on Thursday, Mrs Justice Steyn said the decision to allow drilling in Dunsfold was “not sufficiently similar to trigger application of the consistency principle”.
Steyn also dismissed an argument that the decision to approve the plan failed to give enough weight to conserving and enhancing landscape and scenic beauty in AONBs.
“The fact that harm is to the AONB increases the weight to be attributed to it,” she said. “But the harm to the AONB from a temporary development such as this clearly can, in principle, attract moderate weight in the overall planning balance.”
Last year the government gave UK Oil & Gas the green light to spend three years drilling for oil on agricultural grazing land near Dunsfold.
The picturesque village, which dates back to Norman times, sits on the Weald basin, a topographical region stretching across south-east England that is estimated to contain hundreds of thousands of tonnes of oil.
The development will involve building an exploratory borehole and a sidetrack borehole, an access track and works to widen nearby roads.
Sarah Godwin, the director of Protect Dunsfold, which brought the judicial review proceedings together with the local council, said they were “deeply disappointed” and would consider an appeal.
“It seems incredible that within the current context of extreme weather conditions throughout the northern hemisphere, planning policy still supports such speculative and unnecessary onshore oil and gas exploration,” she said.
The Guardian has contacted UK Oil & Gas for comment.
